On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 03:24:28PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> That would just break the whole idea behind softnet. When you're juggling
I agree ;(.
Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ a
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 03:29:39PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 04:38:24AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > We must be talking about different things. It of course detects it on
> > ACK input, but only for data it did send itself. Every TCP detects
> > reordering automatic
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 04:38:24AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> We must be talking about different things. It of course detects it on
> ACK input, but only for data it did send itself. Every TCP detects
> reordering automatically on the input with the sequence number check,
> but all we still do is
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 08:56:57PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
>Just use __cacheline_aligned instead, like I did with the
>ip_local_data in the patch you just rejected. There is still the
>problem that generic SMP x86 kernels use a 32byte cacheline. Not a
>problem currently becau
Date:Wed, 20 Sep 2000 04:38:24 +0200
From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
We must be talking about different things. It of course detects it
on ACK input, but only for data it did send itself. Every TCP detects
reordering automatically on the input with the sequence numb
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 06:54:30PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:51:37 +0200
>From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>Receiver side SMP reordering is still there, but I'm not sure if it is
>>fixable (but it'll surely hit people that cannot use
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:51:37 +0200
From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Receiver side SMP reordering is still there, but I'm not sure if it is
>fixable (but it'll surely hit people that cannot use Linux senders, I
>just see the reports)
>
> Reordering is
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 06:13:38PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:14:10 +0200
>From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>The ipid handling is still fishy, it will break when you talk to
>more destinations than the inetpeer cache can take (I fixed it in
>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:14:10 +0200
From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The ipid handling is still fishy, it will break when you talk to
more destinations than the inetpeer cache can take (I fixed it in
my local tree with the appended patch)
I don't like this change, please
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 05:14:39PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> And hey, guess what, as a result of this right now my "non-driver
> caused" core/ipv4/ipv6 networking bug list is pretty much empty right
> now. Only a few netfilter glitches appear to remain.
Some items for your list:
The ipid
10 matches
Mail list logo
